Seminar Transcript - Reimagining Skills and Ability Scores

Sir Robilar · Jan 30, 2012

Has it been announced yet how basic ability checks are made in this system? 2E's roll under mechanic or the later approach of d20 + ability modifiers against a set DC? Can't find the information...

trancejeremy · Jan 30, 2012

Dice4Hire said:
And really, having a half-giant and a halfling the exact same at a muscle based class is ridiculous. Now, having the 4th level halfling just as good a fighter in every single mechanical way as the 1st level half-giant, I can fully support.

The trouble is, when you deal with things like halfings and half-giants, you are trying to apply logic to things that just don't make sense.

3 1/2' tall, 70 lb creatures would never, ever survive a fight with anything bigger. They just don't have the mass to inflict much damage or take any of it.

Similarly, giants (even half-giants) would simply fall over thanks to their great weight. I mean, 7' is about as humans can get without having really bad health problems (unless they are fairly svelte, Shaquille O'Neal for instance is only 300 pounds and has avoid the health problems that plagued people like Andre the Giant)

So my point is, if you handwave away the laws of nature and allow such creatures to be adventurers, you can't then be too picky when there are results that don't make much sense.

Reynard · Jan 30, 2012

Rechan said:
[/SIZE]Ewww. Instead of resolving things with one action, now you have to add a second action? That's going to add double the time just to resolve something.

This also means that monster ability scores are really important. Something that I haven't been giving my monsters in a long time (not bothering doing the math/balancing to give them scores).

I really dislike the significance of Ability scores. Earlier editions you needed really high ability scores to be competent in your class's features (hitting, spellcasting), now it's also important to just do things like jumping over pits et al. That means that if you're like me and like somewhat balanced ability, you're not going be good at anything.

I like opposed rolls: they tend to ramp up the uncertainty, and more uncertainty is better, IMO. If, frex, the attacker has a +10 (on a d20) and the defender has a d20+2 instead of a AC of 12, tension increases and the probability of an unexpected result goes up. That's just more fun to me. Granted, it isn't necessarily D&D, but it could be.

Olgar Shiverstone · Jan 30, 2012

Yay! Electrum pieces!

As to the rest ... we'll see how it is implemented.

I think ability-focused skills can speed up the game, as long as they don't have the unintended consequence of over-weighting ability scores, which has long running implications for everything from stat generation to magic item distribution.

The save vs. attack thing seems ... awkward. Why take one roll and make it two? I thought 4E was particularly effective in this regard, streamlining rolls. Actions should be resolved with the fewest rolls possible, and where possible the PCs should make the roll. So if there is a rolled saving throw mechanic, it should be against things with fixed DCs. If you go down the opposed roll route, how do you feel about rolling a defense rather than attacking a static AC?

Silver standard make for better economics, but will take some significant recalibration for everyone.

Themes? Novel, but I've never felt we needed rules for character background; this was always an area for roleplaying to shine.

Morrus · Jan 30, 2012

Sir Robilar said:
Has it been announced yet how basic ability checks are made in this system? 2E's roll under mechanic or the later approach of d20 + ability modifiers against a set DC? Can't find the information...

DC has been mentioned in various contexts. The chances of it not being d20 + mod are so small that I promise to eat my hat if it's not that.

Greg K · Jan 30, 2012

Dragonblade said:
Oh and racial penalties need to die in a fire!

Hell, no!

Therefore, having a racial penalty is like being double punished for playing against type. I'd like to make more races viable to play more classes, not less.

Let's not mechanically punish players more than necessary for trying to be creative and playing against type.

Not everyone considers it a punishment. Nor is it necessarily creative to play against type based on what you are proposing. If you want to be creative, find creative ways in play to make the concept work.

Hawke · Jan 30, 2012

Morrus said:
I've always been of the opposite school of thought. I've always wanted race to be more important than it is.

Usually, it has a bit of an effect at first (not much) and by 5th level there's no difference to note between a hafling and a half-orc. But I WANT there to be a real noticeable difference between those two choices for the entire character life. A half-orc should be big and strong, and halfling should not (unless you do some weird stuff).

I've always felt that, too. What about one of the following:

-Level Progression - Just as your class gets features or abilities, so does your race as you level. Closer to Gamma World, I suppose, but perhaps with not equal affects... but you just know at level 9 your next racial feature is available.

-Theme option - pick it instead of a different theme to really emphasize your racial features at the expense of some other theme.

-Full Class Option - available to multi into with maybe 10 levels worth if you really want to show some benefits based on your races.

Obviously some races are easier than others.

Aldarc · Jan 30, 2012

The Great Wheel? Rolling for ability scores? Rolling for saves? There are a lot of other "little things" in this latest report that now have me worried that 5e is taking too many conservative steps backwards and being far less modular than they were advertising.

BASHMAN · Jan 30, 2012

Wow. It seems as if they read my mind, and used it to make all their design notes. After reading this, I imagine the last staff meeting went something like this:

"What things from 4e does Chris wish would "die in a fire"? Okay be sure not to put that in there. What things from BECMI, 2e, and 3.x did Chris like? Okay be sure to put all those things in there. We really want to ensure Chris likes this game; it is our #1 design goal."

SeRiAlExPeRiMeNtS · Jan 30, 2012

Reynard said:
I like opposed rolls: they tend to ramp up the uncertainty, and more uncertainty is better, IMO. If, frex, the attacker has a +10 (on a d20) and the defender has a d20+2 instead of a AC of 12, tension increases and the probability of an unexpected result goes up. That's just more fun to me. Granted, it isn't necessarily D&D, but it could be.

Yes, and the AC roll can be simply a dex save with some mods for the armor...